>Date: Tue, 9 Nov 1999 19:44:29 -0500
>From: "Feldman, Mark" <MFeldman@CM-P.COM>
>Subject: Ha'aretz article on those who become non-observant
>
>Anybody have any information on this excerpt from the article?
><<. [An organization] has been disseminating a pamphlet called "Da'at Emet"
>[The Knowledge of Truth] that uncovers contradictions and faults in the
>Torah and Talmud. One of the authors of the pamphlet, an ultra-Orthodox
>yeshiva head who became non-observant, relates that he has already met three
>newly secular youths who say that the pamphlet helped them decide to cross
>over. >>
>
>Kol tuv,
>Moshe
>
I did not read this particular article but if this is who I think it is, I
have read other things about him and have heard him interviewed on the
radio a couple of times.
Apparently he learned for many years in a kollel (I think he was an FFB) in
Bnai Brak. He married and had kids. At some point he was exposed to or
started reading or otherwise became aware of geology, biology, astronomy
etc. and the questions they can raise regarding age of the earth,
evolution, biblical criticism etc. More importantly, he began to see that
many of the statements by Cha"Zal that address issues of science (as he saw
them) were at variance with current scientific understanding. This blew
him away and he joined the swelling ranks of the Chozrei Lish'eilah and
Kippot Zerukot (the latter being the term used to describe ex-Kippot
Serugot types... but that is a different crisis).
After a bit, with the true zeal of the converted, he decided to found an
oganization to enlighten the denizens of B'nai Brak & other Hareidi
strongholds regarding the truth of science as he sees it. As such he began
distributing pamphlets espousing his viewpoint and urging others from the
yeshiva world to join him. Suffice it to say that made him somewhat
unpopular in BB and he demanded police protection. He may have also filed
some lawsuit against the city gov't of BB that they should protect his
right to counter-brainwash just as Habad can distribute literature that
does brainwash, in his view. But I am not 100% sure on this last point.
It is a sad story indeed... but one that argues **FOR** ensuring that
yeshivas etc., include a solid grounding in science and secular studies so
that their students are not blown away by "new revelations" if and when
they encounter such knowledge later in life.
hg
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Hershel & Susan Ginsburg Internet: ginzy@netvision.net.il
P.O. Box 1058 / Rimon St. 27 Phone: 972-2-993-8134
Efrat, 90435 FAX: 972-2-993-8122
Israel
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Harry Maryles <hmaryles@yahoo.com> writes in v4n119:
: If I am to discern a distinction between RAYHK and the standard Chassidic
: model, it is that RAYHK is concerned with "Kiddush *Ha*'Chomer" while
: Chassidus is concerned with "Kiddush *Al Yedei* Chomer". But it seems, then,
: that R' Lamm is proposing that "Chomer" is a valid form of Avodah without
: "Kiddush".
I'm not sure I'd agree with your charecterization of RAYHK's position. He
doesn't believe in sanctifying the mundane, as he doesn't believe that chol
is real. The difference between kodesh and chol is an illusion, caused by
the olam's tendency liha'aleim the kudsha ila'ah inherent in the means and
only allows us to see it in the telos. Chol is therefore "just" those things
whose kedushah ila'a isn't percievable because they exist as means, not
ends.
One isn't mekadeish the chol as much as using it for its tachlis, which is
where (observable) kedushah resides.
He's therefore not as far from R' Lamm as you describe. RAYHK sees gashmius
(chomer means substance as opposed to tzurah, and is therefore a less than
great choice in discussing RAYHK's view of chol) as having inherent kedusha.
The difference between using the chol to serve the kodesh and mastering the
chol (as in RYBS's understanding of "mil'u es ha'aretz *vikivshuha*) is
only in the obviousness of the kedushah of the former vs the hiddeness in
the latter.
Which is why a secular Zionist had such kedushah according to this system.
Even without serving Torah, just mastering that part of Olam haZeh necessary
for kedushas ha'aretz is inherently steeped in kedushah ila'ah. Even with
the most chol of intentions. It "just" means the kedushah is very hidden.
Chomer is therefore a valid form of avodah in and of itself according to RAYHK
as well.
In v4n118 RHM writes:
: The Kookian model is based on the relationship of Torah (the sacred) and Mada
: (the profane) and the fact that everything that is profane (not yet holy)
: is to be found in and sanctified through the Torah.
As I said, yes-and-no. Profane is more like "something whose holiness is not
yet observable" according to how I understood RAYHK. All comes from HKBH and
serves His tachlis for the world, everything has kedushah ila'a.
This kedushah ila'ah is also the Orot of which RAYHK speaks of so often.
I therefore would not assume a distinction in RAYHK's thought between using
the chol to serve the kadosh and raising nitzotzos. "Nitzotzos", quanta of
Orot, are "raised", made visible, when the chol is used to serve the tachlis
of beri'ah. Which is using it for kedushah -- apparant or not-yet-apparant.
-mi
--
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287 MMG"H for 10-Nov-99: Revi'i, Toldos
micha@aishdas.org A"H
http://www.aishdas.org Pisachim 66b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light. Melachim-II 3

From: "Yosef Gavriel and Shoshanah M. Bechhofer" <sbechhof@casbah.acns.nwu.edu>
> From: Jonathan J. Baker <jjbaker@panix.com>
> One quibble: I do not agree that the TYY supports your position. I agree
> that since I am not aware of any specific reference to CC in TYY that I
> cannot prove that I am correct from the TYY.
> - ----- Original Message -----
> > RYGB points out that we are at an impasse, since to disprove me
> > he can effectively only quote the Toldos Yaakov Yosef, which sup-
> > ports me: everyone else who wrote after the split is writing with
> > a post- split interpretation (in my view).
I think I already stipulated that whether AbG justifies TuM/CC is an
extrapolation from "what does the ThR and the TYY mean by "everything",
so of course there cannot be a direct textual proof. Maybe someone
can look in R' Lamm's book to tell us what kind of proof *he* brings,
if any?

From: "Rayman, Mark" <>
> Subject: Office Mincha
>
<<> Since the topic came up...
>
> We have had a mincha minyan in our office building (downtown NY) for
> about 7 years.
> Lately, a few people have complained that mincha takes too long>>
Does it take longer than it took for the last seven years? Why? Are
the people complaining regulars over the last few months/years, or
fall-ins?
Gershon

> From: Eli Turkel <>
> Subject: conservative authors
>
> I remember seeing copies of "Jastrow" in Telshe. Of
> course, at that time (9th and 10th grade), I had no
> knowledege that he was one of the founding fathers of
> the Conservative Movement. I wonder if the Telsher
> RH's were aware of Prof. Jastrow's Historiography.
>
>
> On the other hand how many copies of R. Liberman's commentary on
> Tosefta can one find in yeshivot?>>
In other yeshivas I believe the story is the same. The Jastrow is
tolerated as a necessary evil for younger bachurim (ever try looking up
"teitch" in the Aruch?) which is outgrown after a while. The proof is
that R.Liberman's work is nowhere to be found, nor other works by
sources of questionable, as you say, historiography.
Gershon

Good question.
The only thing I can think of is that when the minyan first started, most of
the mispallelim were "tekkies", computer programmers with somewhat flexible
schedules. Now many of the mispallelim come from the "business" side of
things, and their schedules aren't as flexible.
We timed mincha to be at 1:35 so that we could daven at the same time a
whole year. Most people around here finish their lunch breaks by then.
Moshe
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gershon Dubin [SMTP:gershon.dubin@juno.com]
>
> From: "Rayman, Mark" <>
> > Subject: Office Mincha
> >
> <<> Since the topic came up...
> >
> > We have had a mincha minyan in our office building (downtown NY) for
> > about 7 years.
>
> > Lately, a few people have complained that mincha takes too long>>
>
> Does it take longer than it took for the last seven years? Why?
> Are
> the people complaining regulars over the last few months/years, or
> fall-ins?
>
> Gershon

--- Alan Davidson <perzvi@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> (3) The general level of yiras shomayim, emunas
> Hashem, and emunas gedolim
> (including the torah belief incumbent upon ALL Jews
> that Moshiach can arrive
> at any second) is much lower than was the case
> before World War II.
I'm not so sure you are right about that. There were
far too many families who, when given the opportunity
to leave traditional Judaism because of increaed
opportunities to do so, did just that. Hardly any
families, no matter how religious, were immune.
As for belief in the Messiah's imminent arrival, Af Al
Pi SHEYIsMAMEHA, Im Kol Zeh Achakeh Lo BeChol Yom
SheYovo.
HM
=====
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com

--- Gershon Dubin <gershon.dubin@juno.com> wrote:
> The proof
> is
> that R.Liberman's work is nowhere to be found, nor other works by
> sources of questionable, as you say, historiography.
>
I seem to recall R. Lieberman's work in the Gush Bet Midrash and I
think (?) that it was also in the YU Bet Midrash (definitely in their
library, but that's no chiddush). Can anybody corroborate my
recollections?
Certainly no one in YU ever expressed to me any doubt as to RL's
trustworthiness.
Kol tuv,
Moshe
=====
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com

>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 10:03:00 -0500
> From: Gershon Dubin <gershon.dubin@juno.com>
> Subject: Color Coding
>
> > >From: j e rosenbaum <jerosenb@hcs.harvard.edu>
> > >Subject: Re: Avodah V4 #107
>
> Even a non-BT can be afraid of treifing the kitchen. While in most
> > homes the old rule-of-thumb that the fleishicks area is the one nearest
>
> > the sink and the stove -- it's not always true. I have seen kitchens
> where
> > red was used for Milcheks.
> Sorry to derail this onto another topic, but does anyone know why red
> is so universally meat-is it an
> association with blood? How about green/blue for dairy-no easy free
> association on that?
>
red for meat as you say is based on blood and the color of meat (at least
red meat) the green blue AFAIK is based on Rokeach kosher soap, the
staple in every Jewish home in america prior to the common usage of
liquid detergent. It came in red and blue/green colors.
> Perhaps I should have started by asking if this is as universal as some
> of us assume-Sefaradi contribution anyone?
>
> Gershon
>

Amid a few requests to clarify myself (in addition to my response earlier in
this digest), I am not saying evaluative about the frum world, the modern
world, etc. What I am replying to is a very curious post to this list this
morning which seemed to imply that hiskashrus with a Ruv, Rebbe, or Mashpia
is somehow yet another newfangled late 20th century chumra which never was
part of Judaism before -- which inevitably leads to slogans on Yarmulkes and
black hats and other halachically questionable behaviors.
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

Micha Berger wrote:
> 2- Why no sherarah?
(Serarah, I think, is more correct, miLashon Sar rather than miLashon
Sherirah.)
Rav Moshe's Teshuvos on women as Mashgichot and Shul Presidents must be noted
(Yoreh Deah II 44-45). Rav Moshe contends that the Rambam is the only source
for this idea.
Rav Moshe makes it crystal clear that one should not disobey the Rambam's
statement; my only point is that those who offer the various explanations of
Kol Kevudah do not, necessarily, have to answer for the Rambam.
> 3- Why then if the primary criterion for pitur "shehazman geramah"? Why
> wouldn't the "outsideness" of the mitzvas asei be sufficient cause for
> a p'tur? After all, reshus but mitzvah is the relationship to "outside"
> in general.
Doing an about-face and running back to the Rambam, the Rambam (Peirush
haMishnayos Kiddushin 29) insists that "Zeman Gerama" is artificial taxonomy
and not the "reason" behind the exemptions. How early do we find "Zeman
Gerama" listed as a cause for the exemptions?
Mordechai Torczyner
HaMakor! http://www.aishdas.org/hamakor Mareh Mekomos Reference Library
WEBSHAS! http://www.aishdas.org/webshas Indexing the Talmud, Daf by Daf
Congregation Ohave Shalom, Pawtucket, RI http://members.tripod.com/~ohave

--- Gershon Dubin <gershon.dubin@juno.com> wrote:
> my impression is
> that there is a separate and distinct function of
> the "Rov" than the
> "Rebbe". The Rebbe would be asked for advice,
> brochos, etc. while the
> Rov would be asked strictly halachic shailos. This
> is NOT to say that
> many Rebbes don' t combine the two functions but it
> is not always or even
> usually the case.
I stand corrected. Thanks to all those who informed me
of this distinction.
The questions arise: Why does the Rebbe not want to
Paskin? Does he trust someone other than himself to
Paskin? Does he not trust himself? Does he not want
to bother? Does he not have the time for everything,
and if so, does he think his guidance outside the
realm of Psak is more important than Psak, delegating
Psak to an underling? If that is so than why? What
can be more important than Paskeing correctly?
HM
=====
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com

Why don't you switch to 12:45 or 1:00 for the winter and see if that
helps?
Besides wanting a hoche kedusha they're probably speeding up davening as
well.
Gershon
On Wed, 10 Nov 1999 18:07:06 -0500 "Rayman, Mark" <mrayman@lehman.com>
writes:
> Good question.
>
> The only thing I can think of is that when the minyan first started,
> most of
> the mispallelim were "tekkies", computer programmers with somewhat
> flexible
> schedules. Now many of the mispallelim come from the "business"
> side of
> things, and their schedules aren't as flexible.
>
> We timed mincha to be at 1:35 so that we could daven at the same
> time a
> whole year. Most people around here finish their lunch breaks by
> then.
>

On 8 Nov 99, at 22:05, Russell J Hendel wrote:
> But Carl, the most of the mitzvoth I can think of
> are done in public and with social pressures eg
>
> --davening (in a minyan)
Maybe where you are but not where I am. My shul has no less
than seven officially scheduled minyanim for Shachris every day.
There are at least nine shuls within 500 meters of my house. If
someone doesn't want to daven with a minyan, no one else will
know.
> --giving donations (and getting plaques/ads)
Depends to whom you donate. Certainly not when someone gives
money to individual aniyim (cf. Rambam's madreigos of tzedaka).
> --benching (mezuman)
Not much choice.
> --giving charity to shnorers (your example)
> --treating our parents nicely (they talk about it)
I don't know anyone who treats their parents nicely because they
fear their parents will complain to someone else if they don't.
> --and yes don't we all gossip about how we got
> this ethrog and so and so got this ethrog
We do? Not where I live where there are several mochrim in the
neighborhood.
>
> Finally since this started with a gmarrah in
> bracoth let me add a midrash rabbah
>
> >>If Reuven had known that the Tnach
> >>would write up how he tried to save
> >>Joseph he would have run and acted
> >>more intensely
>
> So we see that positive mitzvoth ARE
> affected by social pressures
I won't argue that they never are, but I think that more often than
not social pressures have nothing to do with positive mitzvos. And
the Gemara about someone who wants to be over an aveirah
wearing black and going to another town certainly implies that the
social pressure is for the negative mitzvos.
-- Carl (still in Toronto tonight, but heading home IY"H in the
morning)
------- End of forwarded message -------

On 9 Nov 99, at 3:44, harry maryles wrote:
> >From what I know about it , Macon Lev caters to
> Americans.
Actually, Machon Lev is post high school and is mostly Israeli.
> The best known case of this type of school is Marava.
> This is a Yeshiva patterend after the American style
> of Yeshiva which has Limudei Kodesh till about 3 or 4
> in the PM and then LC. I believe R. C P Scheinberg
> origianlly gave his haskama on it but was pressured
> (by R. Shach, I believe) to rescind his support.
Maarava is a high school, which has secular studies for about three
hours a day (4-7 P.M.). There is night seder until 9:30, and many of
the boys learn even later. There is very little homework (or so I am
told).
-- Carl

From Shlomo B Abeles <sba@blaze.net.au>
Russell J Hendel <rjhendel@juno.com> wrote
Subject: The Kedusha of Trig
Trig...a waist of time??
There is a beautiful law in OHALOTH about a dead
sheretz that lies underneath a log. Given that you
need an ohel (Tent) of dimensions a cubic tefach
to confer toomah (an actual cube not just volume)
how big does the log have to be in Diameter in order
to confer toomah thru its air space(under the log)
A friend who knows a lot more than I do about the subject matter
(but wishes toi remain anonymous)
sent me the following:
OK, there are two things you can tell him:
>There is a beautiful law in OHALOTH about a dead
>sheretz that lies underneath a log.
1. It's not a sheretz but a kezayis min hameis, because a sheretz is not
metame b'oihel.
>Given that you
>need an ohel (Tent) of dimensions a cubic tefach
>to confer toomah (an actual cube not just volume)
>how big does the log have to be in Diameter in order
>to confer toomah thru its air space(under the log)
>
>NO....I am not going to give the answer next week
>If you want to know this halachah you will have
>to go learn trig.
You can work it out without any trig. by using Pythagoras.
Btw, the mishna is Oholois 12:7, and it gives the circumference as 24 tefochim, but
according to both Pythagoras and trig, it can be a lot less, i.e. just
under than 21 1/2.
SBA

> The gates are in the entrance to what appeared to her as the
> entrance to a
> Chazeir. I asked her, and she can't remember if the word "religious"
> appeared, so I could have been mistaken.
> (and if it didn't you're allowed to call other jews Amalek?)
No -- and I've argued this point with people there before.
> Apparently
> there _is_ some anger at least among some in MS against
> tourists.
Against un-tzniusly dressed and mixed groups of tourists, yes. They make
that very clear, with large signs, before your enter their neighborhood.
> case, this isn't the first time I've heard the term Shiksa used
> indiscriminately against people who dress differently than MS people.'
Again -- if they were wearing slacks, maybe. If they were dressed in a
tznius manner, and acting in a tznius manner?
>
> This is not a press report. This is what my daughter experienced.
I'm not doubting that *something* unpleasant happened. It's the *what* and
*why* I'm unsure of.
>
> This comes under the heading of insult. I can't forgive you, only my
> daughter can.
I did not say your daughter lied (I apologize if it came across that way) --
I just questioned the details and their *objective* accuracy. Why? Because
people usually see what they expect. An example? Everyone knows the old
story about sheets with holes in them. I have seen *many* religious and
non-religious tourists in Meah Shearim who were *certain* they were seeing
them.
The reality? An old-fashioned quilt cover with a hole (about two feet in
diameter) in one side of it.
These people will go back home convinced the MS people use sheets with holes
in them.
>
> Akiva, shame on you. The girls were _not_ filled with such stories.
Unfortunatly, living in Israel it is *impossible* to avoid these stories.
I've heard them from *chareidim* (who were afraid to go to MS because they
expected to be thrown out/attacked).
> LeHeifech. They were told that these were wonderful people who had a
> different lifestyle and that they were going to see and experience a
> different Tisch. I know the girls and their rabbis. They
> went in with a willingness to learn and came out with fear.
Which is a shame. The vast majority of people there *are* wonderful. An
encounter with a few crazies shouldn't be used to dismiss the whole
community.
> Maybe some people there need
> to check themselves if they can't see anything wrong with the kind of
> behavior she and her friends encountered.
I actually agree with you about this -- but your original post wasn't a
condemnation of the behaviour of a *few* people. Your post implied that a
*large* number of people were acting this way.
In the same way that the whole Mizrachi movement was castigated and blamed
for the actions of Amir.
(The actual number of hotheads in MS is quite small.)
> Just b/c you didn't see it, doesn't mean it didn't happen.
That's true -- but I've *never* heard of a group of *tzniusly-dressed* and
*non-mixed* visitors being attacked or harrassed by anyone who wasn't
mentally unbalanced (there are a few in MS) . Neither have the people I
checked with this week in MS.
But I *do not* believe they had broken glass prepared to throw.
> Everyone agrees that Sin'at Chinum is what caused the
> destruction of the Temple. It's time that we stopped
> blaiming everyone "else" (amaleik> etc.) and started
> examining ourselves.
>
Again, I *strongly* agree with you on this point. *Everyone* needs to do a
Chesbon HaNefesh daily about Sin'at Chinam. (it's the only way we'll bring
Moshiach).
Akiva
===========================
Akiva Atwood
POB 27515
Jerusalem, Israel 91274